It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

'Jesus NEVER existed': Writer finds no mention of Christ in 126 historical texts and says he was a

page: 21
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 07:19 AM

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: VVV88

originally posted by: RickinVa

Of course Jesus never existed. God doesn't exist, therefore Jesus can't exist.

Simple really.

And how do you "KNOW" that? Well, you don't of course. So, let's add the following before your post. "It is my belief..." Simple really.

Go ahead.. prove God exists. Simple really.

Oh yeah, that's can't because he doesn't. Simple really.

Reading comprenhension is your friend. Give it a try.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 07:26 AM
a reply to: VVV88

Great rebuttal. You must be top of your class in debate or something. Though I have a question, with such a intellectually devoid response, why did you even bother to respond in the first place? You would have supplied the same level of information without a response as with that response.
edit on 7-10-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 07:46 AM
a reply to: Spider879
One thing I haven't seen brought up yet, in reference to Josephus; is how he can be considered a contemporary historian when he wasn't even born until after Jesus had allegedly died...

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 08:04 AM
Hi all,

I am not religious at all, but I have a great difficulty with this argument. It is very difficult (scientifically impractical?) to prove a negative on lack of evidence. I looked at 100 historical documents and none of them mentioned Queen Victoria. Does that mean Victoria didn't exist, or that I am looking in the wrong place?

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 08:15 AM

originally posted by: booyakasha
One thing i'd like to get straight here. Not believing in Jesus doesn't mean your an atheist at all. I believe Jesus is a metaphor for the sun, the 12 disciples are metaphors for the 12 constellations, Mary Margdelen is the moon, Peter is Jupiter, and a the whole story is actually an ancient science told symbolically about the stars, the planets, the sun, the moon, etc. , and the seasonal influence it has on our consciousness over time.

I believe there is a creator grand architect who designed the geometric laws of the universe and that consciousness creates physical reality and not the other way around.

I believe we are all part of that creator and you can tap into that consciousness through mediation.

Not believing in Jesus has actually freed my mind from the mental slavery of Catholic religion i was raised in.

I believe all religions are a means of controlling peoples minds who don't have the courage and curiosity to look for answers themselves. "Jesus" said it himself, don't cast pearls to swine...

Why does the vatican have a giant statue of a pinecone in the middle of the yard. (they know the power of the pineal gland and they are hiding it from you)

Not believing in Jesus doesn't mean your an atheist or a bad person. Believing in Jesus gives you an excuse to be a bad person because you can just ask the priest to absolve you of your sins.

I believe that most major religions are Saturn worshipping pedophile rings at the very top, who are controlling the publics mind through mass media and social manipulation, sending people to wars for their private gains and keeping people as spiritually ignorant as possible so they can run away with the power and money.

I believe religion and Jesus are used as a tool to get YOU to stop questioning anything more than what they tell you to think.

One of the more educated posts in this thread.

I'm a Saturn worshipper. It gets a bad name. But its all strategic. Kind of like a sign saying "don't look here its bad

I was never religious until I figured out that the 7 Giants/Kings/Pharoahs(Planets!) in the skies were behaving exactly the same at the Galactic Level as they do at the Quantum.

Jesus walking on water = The sun rising(Ra)+setting(Set) on Horizon (Horus Zone)
Jesus turning water into wine - Evaporation - Rain - Grapes grow on vines.
Nodding Yes = Sun's Solstices - Shaking NO = Sun's Equinox's

There is nothing - absolutely nothing more important than worshipping the planetary bodies. And all you have to do is look at Nature to understand it. Look at yourself. No books to buy. No penance to pay.

While I'm here though. Christianity was created and used as controlled opposition in Rome. By the very people that would want you to believe it was a threat. Not much has changed in our current geopolitical operations. It was designed to usher in the Age of Pisces. Just like we are all being currently conditioned to accept the Newest spiritual incarnation given to us from the powers that be. (A return to Paganism in my opinion)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 08:29 AM
Original referenced post- nested quote:

originally posted by: MarkJS
Two points:
-The whole calendar system revolves One Person - Jesus. So every day that you live is in reference to Jesus' existence. You can't get more proof of a Jesus than that.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: MarkJS
Two points:
-The whole calendar system revolves One Person - Jesus. So every day that you live is in reference to Jesus' existence. You can't get more proof of a Jesus than that.

Tuesday is named for the Norse god Tyr, Wednesday for Woden (Odin), Thursday for Thor, and Friday for Frey. Is that proof that those gods existed? Using your illogic, it must be.

Sure, but to make it clearer, I'm referring to the year zero in the Gregorian calendar, which was started by the Romans. They must have known something that you don't.
edit on 7/10/2014 by MarkJS because: added nested quote of quoted post for easier reference

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 08:45 AM
a reply to: 131415

He wasn't a metaphor for the Sun or any Planet.........

CHAPTER VIII 1 The neighboring countries resounded with the prophecies of Issa, and when he entered into Persia the priests became alarmed and forbade the inhabitants to listen to him.
2 And when they saw all the villages welcoming him with joy and listening devoutly to his sermons, they gave orders to arrest him and had him brought before the high priest, where he underwent the following interrogation:
3 "Of what new God cost thou speak? Art thou not aware, unhappy man, that Saint Zoroaster is the only just one admitted to the privilege of communion with the Supreme Being,
4 "Who ordered the angels to put down in writing the word of God for the use of his people, laws that were given to Zoroaster in paradise?
5 "Who then art thou to dare here to blaspheme our God and to sow doubt in the hearts of believers?"
6 And Issa said unto them: "It is not of a new God that I speak but of our Heavenly Father, who has existed since all time and who will still be after the end of all things.
7 "It is of him that I have discoursed to the people, who, like unto innocent children, are not yet capable of comprehending God by the simple strength of their intelligence or of penetrating into his divine and spiritual sublimity.
8 "But even as a babe discovers in the darkness its mother's breast, so even your people, who have been led into error by your erroneous doctrine and your religious ceremonies, have recognized by instinct their Father in the Father of whom I am the prophet.
9 "The Eternal Being has said to your people through the medium of my mouth: 'You shall not worship the sun, for it is but a part of the world which I have created for man.
10 "'The sun rises in order to warm you during your work; it sets to allow you the repose which I myself have appointed.
11 "'It is to me, and to me alone, that you owe all that you possess, all that is to be found about you, above you, and below you."'
12 "But," said the priests, "how could a people live according to the rules of justice if it had no preceptors?"
13 Then Issa answered, "So long as the people had no priests, the natural law governed them, and they preserved the candor of their souls.
14 "Their souls were with God, and to commune with the Father they had recourse to the medium of no idol or animal, nor to the fire, as is practiced here.
15 "You contend that one must worship the sun, the spirit of good and of evil. Well, I say unto you, your doctrine is a false one, the sun acting not spontaneously but according to the will of the invisible Creator who gave it birth
16 "And who has willed it to be the star that should light the day, to warm the labor and the seedtime of man.
17 "The Eternal Spirit is the soul of all that is animate. You commit a great sin in dividing it into a spirit of evil and a spirit of good, for there is no God outside the good,
18 "Who, like unto the father of a family, does but good to his children, forgiving all their faults if they repent them. 19 "The spirit of evil dwells on the earth in the hearts of those men who turn aside the children of God from the strait path.
20 "Wherefore I say unto you, Beware of the day of judgment, for God will inflict a terrible chastisement upon all those who shall have led his children astray from the right path and have filled them with superstitions and prejudices;
21 "Those who have blinded them that see, conveyed contagion to the healthy, and taught the worship of the things that God has subordinated to man for his good and to aid him in his work.
22 "Your doctrine is therefore the fruit of your errors; for desiring to bring near to you the God of truth, you have created for yourselves false gods."
23 After having listened to him, the magi determined to do him no harm. But at night, when all the town lay sleeping, they conducted him outside of the walls and abandoned him on the high road, in the hope that he would soon become a prey to the wild beasts.
24 But, protected by the Lord our God, Saint Issa continued his way unmolested.
edit on 7-10-2014 by DrunkYogi because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 09:13 AM
Interesting and timely find regarding the OP.

Newly-Found Document Holds Eyewitness Account of Jesus Performing Miracle - See more at:

Rome| An Italian expert studying a first century document written by the Roman historian Marcus Velleius Paterculus that was recently discovered in the archives of the Vatican, found what is presumed to be the first eyewitness account ever recorded of a miracle of Jesus Christ. The author describes a scene that he allegedly witnessed, in which a prophet and teacher that he names Iēsous de Nazarenus, resuscitated a stillborn boy and handed him back to his mother.

Luke 8:17
"For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light.


posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 09:32 AM
i wouldnt call this single finding proof. more like another piece of evidence(along with 18 million other pieces) that as part of a collective proves he didnt exist.

i could maybe believe there was a MAN named jesus that lived back then. a normal dude that liked to make furniture and frequent the jerusalem equivalent of a red light district.

personally though, the only evidence i need to show that he didnt exist is the bible itself.

the stories in it and the things jesus did violated all the known physical laws of our universe...
isnt that enough?

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:13 AM
a reply to: DeadSeraph

Two vids side by side pro and con
Pay attention to Paul 's supposed statement that he didn't received the Gospel from a man called Christ but the risen Christ
this is at time 30:50
The tightest part of the pro vid is the Josephus angle but he was still getting his info after the risen Christ about his crucifixion but this many critics find suspect as a possible interjection of Eusebius a Bishop of the 3rd cent.

The Pro Vid also got into the issue of Christ Vs Chrestos as a tile rather than a personal name this in my view doesn't bolster the presenter's case for if it was a title of Greco Egyptian origin that leads right back to Serapis for he is simply Osiris.


A correspondence of Emperor Hadrian refers to Alexandrian worshippers of Serapis calling themselves Bishops of Christ:
'Egypt, which you commended to me, my dearest Servianus, I have found to be wholly fickle and inconsistent, and continually wafted about by every breath of fame. The worshipers of Serapis (here) are called Christians, and those who are devoted to the god Serapis (I find), call themselves Bishops of Christ.'

Hadrian to Servianus, 134A.D. (Quoted by Giles, ii p86)
In fact, it appears that some followers of Serapis were eventually expelled from Rome when, in 19 AD, Tiberius also expelled the Jews.

Read more:

Early Christianity

Serapis may have finally had certain ties with the early Christian community. There were certainly some similarities between Serapis and the Hebrew God. Serapis was a supreme god, and it seems that some early worshippers of Christ amongst the Gentiles could have possibly worshipped Serapis either purposefully, or confusing him with Christ, though the confusion seems more likely to have been one of language.
Read more:

Now I am still not convinced that an historical Jesus never lived I'll just say I don't know,but if he did it's certainly not in the way we think of him.
edit on 7-10-2014 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:17 AM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No sense in wasting my time on the clueless. You state personal opinions as facts and when called out on it you obfuscate. Have a great day.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:18 AM
a reply to: DeadSeraph

Please show me where Josephus writings on Jesus have been contested by scholars outside of the obvious Christian edits.

All of Josephus references to Jesus, the Christ, are pious forgeries. I've already provided the link, twice.

For that matter, please show me where Josephus mention of John the baptist has been contested by scholars.

Please show me where I have ever made such a claim! Besides, the mention of John the Baptist does nothing to prove the historicity of Jesus Christ.

The rest of your post is a red herring that has nothing to do with my arguments.

edit on 7-10-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-10-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:29 AM
a reply to: Akragon

This is where I loose all respect for Bart Ehrman. He's welcome to believe what he wants, of course, but he has set an agenda to go out and attack those who don't believe in a historical Jesus, even though his research and his books belie the historical Biblical Jesus existence.

I believe that's where Ehrman becomes a paid shill for the Christian Universities that hire him.

It's obvious to me that the Bible has distorted, beyond recognition, any truth about who the real Jesus was, if he was. Certainly, the biblical character of Jesus Christ did not ever exist. Bart Ehrman is intellectually dishonest in his criticism of those who reject the biblical model of Jesus Christ and his existence.

edit on 7-10-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:32 AM

originally posted by: VVV88
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No sense in wasting my time on the clueless. You state personal opinions as facts and when called out on it you obfuscate. Have a great day.

There you go again. Now you go off with the ad hominems. Also pretending like you have the intellectual high ground when you have done NOTHING to develop the conversation between us intellectually. You are on a roll here.

How am I obfuscating anything when your response to me did nothing to develop the conversation? You didn't even write why you disagreed with me. What I did was show you that your post was a logical fallacy, which is true. It is a logical fallacy. I've even outlined to another poster in this thread why that is the case when he actually did the mature thing and respond to me with an actual rebuttal instead of useless filler posts like yours. If you didn't want to speak to me anymore, you should have just left that post alone and not responded to it. Waste of time indeed...

Interestingly, the clueless ARE the people you should be wasting time with. What's the point in talking to the people who already know your answers? Or do you enjoy having discussions in echo chambers?
edit on 7-10-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:34 AM
a reply to: MarkJS

You can say this or that, but you can Never say that you didn't know how to, or that you never had an opportunity. You just ran out of that excuse by reading the previous

Because you beleive makes it true?

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:44 AM
a reply to: windword

Exactly. His name wasn't even Jesus. It was Yeshua or Joshua.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:08 AM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It should have been Emmanuel. But, it was Jesus, AKA Joshua, because Philo, a Jewish Hellenistic philosopher, postulated that the "LOGOS" was a High Priest named Joshua.

edit on 7-10-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:10 AM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: windword

Exactly. His name wasn't even Jesus. It was Yeshua or Joshua.

His name is definitely Jesus (just as the spelling sounds)

And then EHYEH is a revelation of the Covenant God. So that these point to the fullness of the revelation of the GREAT name of Yehshas or Jesus as Creator God, the Blessing God, the Covenant God, and lastly the Saving God. Hence we have here that as the tabernacle and all the symbols and rituals of the Old Testament were TYPES and SHADOWS to be fulfilled and brought to their climax and completion with Christ and the New Testament Church WITH THE REAL, so all the temporary and substitute names and titles of God were only types and shadows of the REAL name of God revealed in Jesus Christ. So that the name of Jesus or Yehshas is not derived from any name of God, but visa versa, they were all derived from and point to Jesus Christ from which they all have their type.

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.Hebrews1

In the ancient Egyptian script the cobra stood for both the letters "G" and "J" and since Moses transferred to the Paleo-Hebrew new word forms using the Egyptian language we expect these sounds to follow. And they did follow up to at least the Babel Babylonian adoption of Aramaic around 600BC.. By removing the pronounciation of the ancient "J" sound from the letter "I" this was accomplished. But, we see the majestic hand of God when the J sound was restored via a new and different method in the King James Version with the name of Jesus correctly

No one has ever gone to heaven and returned. But the Son of Man[a] has come down from heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the bronze snake on a pole in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him will have eternal

When it is properly understood that "Je" is the abbreviation of "YEH" or "JEH" the sacred name of God at the burning bush, and that "Uses or Usus" (these are the same), we have in the name of Jesus a very powerful new identity as the "GOD WHO SAVES BY WATER." So the name of Jesus in a shortened meaning would be simply Saviour! In the very name of Jesus we have the authority of our New Testament water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38).

The Egyptian language was made up of sounds. Partly of vowels and consonants, however; hieroglyphs constantly ignored and left out vowels. How a word sounds in hieroglyphics is more important than how it is spelled. - See more at:

Hieroglyphs emerged from the preliterate artistic traditions of Egypt..Time period
3200 BC – AD 400

All modern letters are conversions of ancient hieroglyphs

edit on 7-10-2014 by Rustami because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:21 AM
a reply to: Rustami

The name Jesus results from translation errors, but that doesn't necessarily make it acceptable to say. The names Mary and Maria are the same (except for the language spoken), but I'm sure that many women named Mary or Maria would be put off if you called them by the other name.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:26 AM
a reply to: windword

In my opinion, it could really be whatever you want it to be since the person described in the bible didn't exist. The stories in the bible may be about an actual person with the name Yeshua or whatever, but that guy was most likely NOTHING like what the bible describes him to be. That would be like believing that North Korea's propaganda accurately describes Kim Jong Un. KJU may be a real person, but the person that the propaganda is describing certainly isn't a real person.

new topics

top topics

<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in